h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

My latest acquisition is the set of all four seasons of "The Tudors." I don't pay for Showtime or HBO or any of the other movie channels, so I missed it when it was shown. I've heard a lot about it and thought I'd give it a try.

What I've seen so far is very well done as long as you don't mind that they get a lot of the history wrong. I mean, historically inaccurate films can be enjoyable to watch as long as you are viewing them for entertainment rather than educational purposes. The thing that worries me is that people will think that is what really happened.

I've managed to get through season two. So far the most glaring errors are that they married the Duke of Suffolk to Henry's sister Margaret when he actually married his sister Mary, who isn't even mentioned and that Woolsey was imprisoned in the Tower and committed suicide when he actually died of natural causes on his way to London. And there are many minor points that are inaccurate but don't really detract from the story. Like Lady Jane Gray being introduced at court to serve Queen Anne when she was really a Lady in Waiting to both Catherine and Anne. And they imply that Catherine was poisoned by Anne. They have carriages and costumes from the wrong time period and show military practices that wouldn't have happened, like placing cannons on a slope that would have caused them to recoil back downhill every time they were fired. And Henry isn't getting fat and dissipated.

But I am genuinely enjoying the series.

Good grief! Jane Seymour, I mean. I'm as ditzy as the writers.

That sounds like a mess. I assume everybody's sexy. As a history writer for students, this sort of thing irritates me when they get major points wrong - because then the students will think it happened that way. I mean, can watch the movie and then research the discrepancies, but who besides us is going to do that?

Or, why we hate 'The Patriot' and 'Braveheart', and anything else Mel Gibson thinks of. I saw a review yesterday of a 1940 film on Brigham Young. The mind boggles as to what they might have told an innocent public about Nauvoo.

A few weeks ago, I had to research and debunk the origin of an urban legend that had got into the multiculturalism course. Because, as it turned out, Denzel Washington had made a speech in a film, and our schoolteachers saw the movie. I found an outraged Ethnic Studies prof who set everybody straight.

On the other hand, we're thoroughly enjoying 'Blackadder', which we've never seen before. 'With additional dialogue by William Shakespeare', indeed......

Blackadder is a genuine hoot! And everyone is very sexy. We both know that not all of the Queen's household would have been that attractive. They were chosen because of family connections, not appearance.

Glad you're enjoying it Hyp. I've heard good things from a few friends, though they also point out it's pretty much pure entertainment, rather than being a history lesson.

I don't hate Mel Gibson's "historical" films, as much of a history buff I am. As you two indicate, these films are intended to be entertaining. If the audience attempts to derive historical information from these films, then I would blame them for that. (of course, I may just be saying that because I really enjoy Braveheart)

I love watching these sorts of shows on DVD after they've wrapped up. Much better than waiting from week to week, half-forgetting what happened last week and sitting through commercials (though that's obviously not the case with the HBO shows). I'm currently working my way through The Wire now

I much preferred 'Rob Roy'. If you're going to make it up, make up something *good*.

Blackadder is brilliant. Haven't seen the Tudors though.

I've heard they've made a TV series of the Cadfael books by pseudonym Ellis Peters - that's something I think I'd enjoy watching.

Ti, the Cadfael series is a good one. Derek Jacobi plays Cadfael. That was one of the first series I ever bought on DVD. I wish they had made more of them. And Syn has the Rome series that was on HBO. I enjoyed that one, too. I have preordered season one of The Borgias. It won't be out for a while yet.

Sexy Tudors: http://www.harkavagrant.com/index.php?id=230

Braveheart...

How can you leave the bridge out of the Battle of Sterling Bridge?

(Other than that I don't know enough to argue.)

Elektra's falling about over here. Good one.

I don't have a TV so a DVD player is pointless; I get my fix from streaming Netflix and from the online sites for broadcast and cable stations. Often, you can get the episodes available the next day -- although, since viewership online doesn't count toward the Nielson ratings, some stations like Syfy and USA play the first two episodes the next day, then delay the rest of the season 30 days or more, to try to make you watch content where it counts. And there are commercials, but they're a minute or 90 seconds instead of four minutes.


There's still a lot of folks who don't have broadband or cable -- what do they do for entertainment? Libraries and after school programs are being cut left and right, and telling kids to go out and play in the inner city can be a Bad Idea. Yet another class distinction.

You can get those sexy Tudors on Netflix, SC - we've seen 'em offered, just passed in favour of weirder stuff.

Amen to that complaint.

Telling your kids to go out and play in an urban environment can also be a good idea (even though it might get you arrested. )

http://freerangekids.wordpress.com/about-2/

Kids are individuals. Some kids can be sent free range easier than others. Looking back, one of the best things about my childhood was that I had a lot of freedom. Granted, I grew up in a small town where all the neighbors knew each other and looked out for one another. And it was still the era of stay-at-home moms.

Back to historcal DVDs. Can anyone tell me about the Sparatacus series? Is it any good?

I like historicals -- got hooked for a couple of years on English history when I was 11, after seeing Bette Davis play Queen Liz the first...which firstly, illustrated for me that there's historical and then there's actual history!

Great links, CZ and Gnomon! That comic is priceless, and I'm following freerangekids on WordPress now. I had a similar upbringing to Hyp, although I grew up in a suburb of Detroit. You can let kids have freedom, but it's really important to know your kids' maturity level.

*realizes she's had too much caffeine this morning*

Hi Hyp

I'm a bit surprised that you like the Tudors. Even after that revelation though, I'm going to stick my neck out and say you'd find Spartacus a bit too much.

Here's what (the deeply annoying but generally accurate) Charlie Brooker has to say about it: http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2010/may/22/charlie-brooker-screenburn-spartacus

A pretty fair summing up really. It's the kind of TV that blokes enjoy provided they've had a few drinks.

Pin

I watched some sequels of the Tudors. I don't recall much of it, really.
If I want historical correctness I watch a documentary - at least I have a chance there that they got their facts right.
I mean, we all know what film makers are doing to books, for instance, so why would we expect to be better doing history entertainment?

That 'Spartacus' review is priceless. I, er, sort of suspected that might be what was going on...

Oh my, Pin. It looks like that one will not be added to my collection.

Bel I agree that people should distinguish between entertainment and a documentary. Let's face it, being totally historically accurate is danged near impossible in a film. Conversations and other personal interactions have to be invented. Sometimes things need added or eliminated to keep the story moving along. Just because something really happened doesn't mean it was interesting or will ruin the story if changed. Poetic license and all that. You can portray the way things were without sticking 100% to the facts as we know them.

Another way to look at it is that having incorrect history in a series like the Tudors gives the viewers a game to play. Find the inventions. It also keeps the story from being quite so predictable. But there are a lot of purists who will rate a film badly due to historical inaccuracies.

It all reminds me of the parables in the New Testament. What earthly difference does it make if there really was a Good Samaritan or not? The point of a parable is to teach a lesson, highlight a moral principle, not recount history. Hypothesis works just fine.

The Tudors series stays true to the period and portrays it in an interesting manner. The spirit of the law rather than the letter of the law, as we were discussing elsewhere. So, sorry to disappoint you Pin with my low tastes , I am enjoying it. But I'm not quite low-brow enough to order Spartacus. I'm really glad I asked.